W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking-international@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Agenda: Global considerations F2F meeting 11-12 Berlin

From: Aleecia M. McDonald <aleecia@aleecia.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:29:50 -0800
Cc: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, Haakon Bratsberg <haakonfb@opera.com>, public-tracking-international@w3.org
Message-Id: <D66C47B5-6DE0-45CD-A2AF-B87BF6448C38@aleecia.com>
To: David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org>
On Feb 25, 2013, at 12:13 PM, David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org> wrote:

> Rigo,
> 
> On 2/25/13 1:11 PM, Rigo Wenning wrote:
>> Definition of DNT:0 needs a clear extensible object. So this mainly is a
>> discussion about the definition of DNT:0. I have changed it to say that
>> now.
> While I do understand the virtue of having a discussion about how DNT may fit into any current for future regulatory regimes in the EU, I definitely do not understand the need to define DNT:0. Why is it not NOT DNT:1?

I thought that was the whole point of the discussion, to determine (a) if it can simply be NOT (DNT:1) or (b) if it needs a specific meaning -- and what that is -- to likely be relevant in the EU. To Kimon's point of legislation not yet passed, perhaps we do well to look at the Netherlands telecomm law that came into force on 1 Jan, 2013. Understanding how DNT could work in harmony with that law, and what the array of viable options looks like, is part of my interest in this session. 

It remains my understanding that:
	- there is no requirement for DNT to harmonize with EU law (current or pending)
	- there is interest on the part of many WG members for DNT to harmonize with EU law
	- it is not clear what that would take, which is what we are going to try to understand
	- whatever options or recommendations come from the Berlin discussions then turn into input to the full TPWG

From what we know of other nations, we heard at the first workshop prior to the formation of the TPWG that the Canadian view is very simple. Tracking of the sort we discuss in DNT is simply illegal. Putting user choice and control around it makes no sense; companies must just stop breaking Canadian laws. Rigo could reach out to the authors of that view and see if they would like to attend, but I do not see how it is a good use of their time or ours right now.

	Aleecia
Received on Monday, 25 February 2013 20:31:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 25 February 2013 20:31:23 GMT